Russell v. Washington Post Co.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hearing’ on an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, on a verdict for nominal damages, in an action of libel. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Robb
Plaintiff, Charles T. Russell, seeks in this action to recover for an alleged libel by defendant, The Washington Post Company, in publishing in its editorial column remarks which, in substance, stated that plaintiff was guilty of scandalous and grossly improper conduct with his lady parishioners and particularly with one Rose Ball. The article is set forth in the margin.* Defendant pleaded general issue, and the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the süm of $1.
*279Plaintiff prosecutes this appeal because of alleged error in tbe admission or exclusion of evidence, and in making or refusing…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Moore v. . FrancisNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Burt v. Advertiser Newspaper Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Hamilton v. . EnoNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Turner v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Gambrill v. SchooleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1901
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Washington Times Co. v. BonnerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
- Phillips v. Evening Star Newspaper Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Jesse B. Manbeck v. Gerald S. OstrowskiCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Lubore v. Pittsburgh Courier Pub. Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1951
- Phillips v. Evening Star Newspaper Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980